بخشی از مقاله انگلیسی
575P. O’Neill, A.S. Sohal / Technovation 19 (1999) 571–581that they are often neglected. Recent evidence sug-gests that these concepts have been incorporated intotools such as IDEF0 (Integrated Definition Method),DFD (Data Flow Diagrams), OOA (Object OrientedAnalysis) (Yu and Wright, 1997), and Prince2(Process based Project Management, see internet ref-erence: Prince2).IChange management. Several authors concentrate onthe need to take account of the human side of reengin-eering, in particular the management of organisationalchange. Some authors (e.g. Mumford and Beekma,1994; Bruss and Roos, 1993) suggest that the manage-ment of change is the largest task in reengineering.Kennedy (1994) on the other hand, incorporate thehuman element of reengineering due to the perceivedthreat it has on work methods and jobs.IBenchmarking. Several authors suggest that bench-marking forms an integral part of reengineering, sinceit allows the visualisation and development of pro-cesses which are known to be in operation in otherorganisations (Harrison and Pratt, 1992; Chang, 1994;Furey, 1993).IProcess and customer focus. The primary aim of BPR,according to some authors, is to redesign processeswith regard to improving performance from the cus-tomer’s perspective (Chang, 1994; Vantrappen, 1992).This provides a strong link with the process improve-ment methodologies suggested by authors from thequality field, such as Harrington (1991a). In somecases, notably Chang (1994), the terminology isalmost identical to that used by quality practitionersin the improvement of processes. The major differ-ence, as outlined earlier, appears to be one of scale.It should be noted that few authors refer to any singletechnique when discussing BPR. Most incorporate amixture of tools, although the nature of the mix dependson the application, whether it be hard (technological)such as proposed by Teng et al. (1994) or soft(management of people), as seen from Mumford andBeekma (1994). While the exact methodologies to beused are the source of some discussion, it can be seenthat BPR, as a strategic, cross-functional activity, mustbe integrated with other aspects of management if it isto succeed. This is particularly true since it is not themethodologies themselves, but rather the way that theyare used which is unique in BPR (Earl and Khan, 1994).Of particular interest are the links between BPR andTQM.